Official Handbook Of Who's Who

Today's entry may run the risk of sounding like the "grouchy old man" in my thoughts.  So let me preface my subject coverage by saying this; I love the research resources the Internet has to offer, in terms of what I cover for this blog.  Seriously, it has come through in a PINCH, more often than not, when my memory fails me for specifics about a specific subject.  Thanks to the Internet, and technology in general, finding comic book trivia on the spot has never been easier, and it's truly a fun time to be a geek!  (Not "Nerd", because I'd have to be more smart and less socially adept to be truly considered a "Nerd".)  So, Internet resources for comic book research, here's hoping your news is ALWAYS good news!

Now let's discuss the subject of today's entry: two valuable resources for comic book knowledge when I was growing up.  I realize before these two titles launched, there had existed OTHER resources to pull on for knowledge... to a point.  There are four particular fonts of knowledge I KNOW you could have been "schooled" on:

• Jules Feiffer's "Great Comic Book Heroes"
• Michael Fleisher's three volume DC Encyclopedias, covering Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman

However, the limitation of these research materials was that the information hit a brick wall... in ALL cases... before the 70's.  In the 80's, comic book readers started to become more demanding about their continuity... and their need to fill in every aspect of comic information.  (But if they were asking about Super Baby, their questions were invalidated because they DID NOT count.)  Marvel may have led the charge on this front, but DC certainly was no slouch in the information-providing front, and their shared competition to be their universal sources SUPREME weirdly mirrored each other!  I bring you...

THE OFFICIAL HANDBOOK OF THE MARVEL UNIVERSE

And...

DC WHO'S WHO: THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE TO THE DC UNIVERSE

As I mentioned, Marvel beat DC to the punch for their universal tour-guide, with their Handbook being released in 1983.  DC waited until the encroaching 50th anniversary of their company's existence to launch "Who's Who" in 1984.  Both titles served the same purpose, which was to provide an in-house reference guide to future employees about the essentials of the characters, and to give the readers fodder for nitpicking.  So... win-win?  Another similarity is that after the launching of the OHOTMU, both books followed a near-annual update series format.  But the titles had some very subtle differences worthy of note.

The Marvel Universe Handbook was, in my eyes, more obsessive over facts and detailed histories over presentation.  For each entry, you did get an original piece of artwork, but it was VERY static.  Think about it as if your featured character was posing for their driver's license.  Each entry also featured panels from the character's other appearances to provide additional "visual flair".  The fun thing about the main piece of original artwork is you have some surprising entries to the artist roster, depending on when they become Marvel staffers.  For example, the first year of the OHOTMU was FAIRLY heavy of John Byrne artwork, because he was their superstar artist at the time.  I believe it was either for an '87 or '88 update that you start seeing some of the future "Big Names" squeaking out some profile pictures.  Names like Todd McFarlane, Jim Lee... and EVEN Rob Liefeld.  Yes... At one point he WAS a big name artist.

Two particular gimmicks the Marvel Universe guides did that I REALLY admired were exemplified in two divergences in the main annual format.  One was a special issue for the first series, detailing the weapons/technology of the Marvel Universe.  Want to know how Iron Man's armor is put together?  It's in the book.  Want an easy anatomy lesson, by studying the bones of Wolverine's adamantium skeleton?  It's in the book.  Even CARE about what technology the Wizard uses?  IT'S.  IN.  THE.  BOOK.  The second occasional treat was the Marvel "Book of the Dead".  This was a series that offered profiles on characters that were deceased at the time of the writing.  I know it was a two-volume entry for the first series, and I believe it received a near 12 issue run for the second series.  But hey, expanded entries allows you to find out the gory details of what happened to Bucky Barnes, Jean Grey, and Norman Osborne!  ... Wait, they're no longer DEAD?!?  Sigh...

On the DC end of reference handbooks, "Who's Who" may have lacked in fingernail grit detail in their profiles, but they MORE than made up for the lack of anal-retentive factoids with AMAZING presentation.  If you've ever seen an issue of "Who's Who", you know every entry comes with a multi-colored surprint in the form of color-coded dots, and a single-color background matching the main entry.  But every entry had ALL ORIGINAL ARTWORK.  Including art from people not even part of the DC Staff.  (Look up Dave Stevens and "Catwoman" if you want to see what I'm talking about.  Mee-yow...)

There's another fun thing about "Who's Who".  The first volume in particular, which ran 26 issues.  Issues EVOLVED as the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" developed during that first volume.  As the specifics were hammered out for the universal changes, you saw that reflected in subsequent entries.  Sometimes you would find out late in the game that a character that was "cozy" in the Bronze Age would be dead... Dead... DEAD!  And one other addition DC gave to their reference volumes; the reverse page of the back cover offered up a semi checklist for where you can expect to see characters appearing, and in what titles.  So if you were DYING to see where Lady Quark would show up next, that checklist might give you a slight indicator!

As times change, and as volumes are updated, the delivery format changes for both companies.  Gone are the standard stapled magazine format around the 90's, and we now start up the loose-leaf binder format for BOTH companies.

To me, this period of both companies' offerings on the reference front eluded my radar.  That's not to say I felt they were of inferior quality, because they probably could have been just as excellent as the other offerings.  But when I have to invest in a SEPARATE item to even properly store the reference materials... Er... I was only just earning a measly allowance around that time in my life.  I wasn't made of money! 

But after the loose leaf period of OHOTMU and "Who's Who", Marvel was the only company to keep with the format of their reference books, on and off, WELL into the 2000's.  The only issue I had with that version of OHOTMU is that the artwork was amazingly generic between entries.  In fact, the style reminded me a lot of the current Marvel advertising artwork.

But while DC quit the regularly published "Who's Who" reference game early, they DID manage to experiment more with universe specific titles, such as their always complicated... even though I am learning to appreciate it... Legion Universe.

And since the company owned the rights to publish the comics, DC even printed a "Who's Who" all about the voyages of the Starship Enterprise!

The closest print equivalent we have to these regular series is the DK Encyclopedias for both of the Universes, and I'm thinking Marvel has that monopoly share, because DC has YET to publish any definitive guide for the "New 52" universe.  (Probably because even after three years of existence, they STILL don't know the complete foundations of the mess of a universe they created...)  But I can still look back at a magic time when even finding out about a company's universe was a monthly treat.